I posted this yesterday, on what turned into a dead thread. I laugh because for the past nine and a half years, it seems that every thread I post on then fizzles to a halt asap. :) I am intrested to hear what people have to say about this case:
First off, I think this is a good thing, and I believe it would end up with the courts determining definitively what a ‘natural born citizen’ actually is. Regardless of opinions here, it is still vague. (And yes, I have read ALL of the arguments about Vattel, etc.)
Here is a question for those who think that it is cut and dry:
My son is twelve. He was born in Virginia. Through his mother (me) he is descended from men who fought in the revolution (letters from Valley Forge in our possession!), as well as both soldiers fighting for the north and south in the Civil War. Also, we have a claim that we are related to one of the original supreme court justices, as well as one of the founding families of Washington, DC. He is totally American.
I was not married to his father (and if you dare tell me off for being a tramp, etc, you can kiss my derriere—I could have avoided that and had an abortion, but I didn’t!!!) who was living in the US as a German national on a work visa. He decided he didn’t want anything to do with the situation, once he was back in Germany. My son has never met him, and has never been to Germany, other than driving through on our way to Spain.
When my son was born, I called the German consulate to see how I might get some child support. They told me that my son was not eligible to be a dual citizen, as we were not married, and the father’s name was not on the birth certificate.
So, if my son is NOT a dual citizen, is not a naturalIZED citizen, was born in the US to a mother who was in her mid-twenties, how is he not a natural born citizen? What court in 2010 would contend that the rights of citizenship would go through his father, whom he has never met/had contact with, as opposed to his mother? What court is going to assign him some type of “lesser” citizenship than a kid whose mom might not know who his dad is? NONE.
This type of case, which is probably fairly common, is what would keep the courts from deciding that there is a third type of citizen (not implicitly stated) in the Constitution.
I know a lot of people screaming about natural born citizenship determined ONLY by two US citizen parents disagree, but I think that the fuzziness of the meaning, and the lack of explanation by the founders, can give the courts a lot of leeway in deciding the way that makes the most sense for the US today.
I am not a troll, and anyone who calls me one is a joke.If there is proof that Obama was born in any other country than the US, you bet, I agree he is NOT a NBC. I loathe the man, and can’t even listen to clips of his voice on Rush, but I do not agree that (if born in the US) he is not a NBC because of his father’s citizenship.
I’ll agree that there are some unusual cases, such as yours. (And by the way, thanks for choosing life.) But the principle is a sound one, I think, namely that when both parents are not American citizens, there is the potential for the non-citizen parent to exert influence. Even if that parent were absentee, there could be influence at some later time.
If father is unknown, the only way to establish which type of citizen a person is would be through the Mother. However, you have constructed a strawman because both you and Barry the Fraud know whom is the father and neither your son nor Barry Soetoro, aka Barry Obama, aka Barack Hussein Obama is a natural biorn citizen according to the way the founders used that term. [BTW, my Mother conceived me due to rape and she chose my birth and life rather than kill me early in my lifetime already begun.]
If the circumstances are as you described, your son is a natural born citizen and you should just ignore this stuff. Not that it’s particularly important unless he plans on being President.
I’ll go with Alexander Hamilton for $400, Alex.
Otherwise I agree with MHG. Alexander Hamilton did not know who his father was either. In your case the father is known to you by name and his citizenship status. I could argue for or against the situation with your son, since it is a situation on the border of things. If I were to take your son as meeting the NBC status because you were not married I, myself, would make a extra burden for such exceptional cases — that your son have been raised as an American, and not as a dual-citizen, and that he has had no relationship greater than blood to his father.
Still, I would be inclined to say he does NOT meet NBC status. Nor do I care where the child was born, I look only to the fact that both the parents were citizens of good standing, even if born abroad.